[flash]

while i completely support the idea behind the regulations, the way it has been twisted is ridiculous

we should absolutely have testing and output requirements - however, requiring a particular device or part to get there is nuts - they should just test the output, and if it passes, that's it - it should not matter what is on the car

the question to answer is "is it more important that a particular part is there or that the car burns clean?" this is where the voters have to get involved

instead we have allowed the bureaucracy to develop and now these smog stations have to go through all kinds of inspections and research to determine whether or not the car has the right stuff on it, and half the time they don't have the answer - so, rather than just determining whether or not a car passes, they get involved in a nightmarish routine of repairs in blind attempts to correct it, even on cars that pass the tailpipe

we need to revamp that process so that the default is the tailpipe - then, if it doesn't pass, you go to corrective measures - but if it passes, let it go, regardless of how it got there

then we add to the spot check stations on the side of the road to nab polluters, and to keep folks from cheating on test day by implementing huge fines for cheating

seems to make sense to me, which is why it will likely never happen

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[968Syncro]

<!--quoteo(post=77496:date=Aug 12 2009, 11:04 AM:name=flash)-->QUOTE (flash @ Aug 12 2009, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->seems to make sense to me, which is why it will likely never happen<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly flash! I have other pet peeves on this whole system, for example the entire smog testing program is loosing its effectiveness and more and more new cars are on the road which rarely fail. The program should include the emissions and energy usage expended to build a new car, in order to not punish us who think we are being very green by driving older cars. By now the total diesel emissions overwhelm the auto emissions, yet nothing is done about it. Emissions requirements should be scaled by how many seats there are in the vehicle, i.e. large vehicles should have looser requirements since they can carry 5-6 people -- emissions should be per people transported in the car, not per vehicle. The exemption date for pre-1975 cars should be moved up every year. Whine, whine!

Roland

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

well, without getting into a debate over this, i think the problem with the number is seats idea is that this would by default encourage people to continue to buy the big gas-guzzling SUV, but not require that they actually use those seats - it would create the opportunity for the soccer mom running to her nail appointment in the big navigator - that is not a good goal

the dyno testing is supposed to simulate the loads of the vehicle - i think we should be testing at higher speeds, but the idea is sound

there is nothing different about the engine that would make it any less clean because it is in a bigger vehicle - my 6 liter engine outputs the same whether it is in the denali or a vette - i think it's fine that the standard is the same for both vehicles, as long as the testing provides an adequate simulation of load at maximum capacity - this would create a worst case measurement that would insure that the large vehicles actually ran clean when loaded, but even cleaner when empty

i get the argument about the enviromental cost of building a new car - i also think we should be getting rid of gross polluter vehicles, but the determination should be at the tailpipe, not by whether or not it has the right gear - i think we should make the testing standard more realistic, and add higher speeds to the test, but the bottom line should still be the tailpipe

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[sstman]

I remember the launch of the 968 in the UK, and a certain car program on BBC TV reviewed the car, and said at the time that " the air leaving the tailpipe of the new Porsche 968 was, because of the design of the engine, and the cat, was cleaner and sweeter smelling than the air going into the front! the link is still available on Youtube I believe.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48GiT-OiAPs

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

it's true - my last smog test the guy had to check to make sure the sniffer hadn't come out of the tailpipe

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Question re our 968s, with a preface : in many cars which have either : 1) not been driven for a while , or , 2) have had a new battery installed, or , a low voltage battery recharged , the car's computer indicates a " not ready " status for smog testing UNTIL the car is driven for about 200 miles and at least a half dozen start and stop cycles . Do the computers in our 968s have the same feature built in ? My garage queen has not been driven more than 10 miles a month for at least a year, but the battery has been on a trickle charger so it's ways at full capacity , but I'm wondering if I still have to drive it for a week and a couple of hundred miles before I take it for a smog test .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[RS Barn]

There isn't any memory in our ECU related to emissions unless a code is triggered. Our cars don't need to be driven a certain amount of miles to tell the ECU all is ok. 

But...The 968's have a pretty rich startup cycle and can carbon up the exhaust system-post O-2 sensor if not driven long enough to heat complete system and burn off. So I would suggest driving car for 10-20 miles at highway speeds with several full load to redline sprints to clean out exhaust before emission tests.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Got it, thanks ! Will do.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.